4 ms·
It ignores the fact that the royal family owns a tremendous amount of assets that are not directly used in tourism or used by the state. And that they live off
by opportune 4y ago
It ignores the fact that the royal family owns a tremendous amount of assets that are not directly used in tourism or used by the state. And that they live off those taxes and spending.
If the UK abolished the monarchy, tourism attractions like Westminster and the Crown Jewels would still exist
- toomanybeersies 4y agoImagine the money they'd make if they turned Buckingham Palace into a hotel.
- nly 4y agoIs 20 odd billion £ really a tremendous amount of assets when the government can magic up 150 billion on a whim to cap energy bills? It's peanuts in the scheme of things. The royal family aren't even that rich amongst the billion class in the US.
- MagnumOpus 4y ago> 20 odd billion £ really a tremendous amount of assets yes > government can magic up 150 billion that is also a tremendous amount which the next British generations will labour decades to pay off, just so today's pensioners can heat their homes to the 25C they are used to, and still have their ski outings in Zermatt.
- sofixa 4y ago> that is also a tremendous amount which the next British generations will labour decades to pay off, just so today's pensioners can heat their homes to the 25C they are used to, and still have their ski outings in Zermatt. It is a tremendous amount indeed, but i don't know why you think it's only pensioners and skiers who would benefit from not having to choose between food and energy.